S. Hr, 106-248 ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION HEARING COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION oN OVERSIGHT HEARING ON THE TITLES AND PROVISIONS IN THE DRAFT REAUTHORIZATION FOR THE ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDU- CATION ACT OCTOBER 27, 1999 WASHINGTON, DC ae U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 60-542 CC WASHINGTON : 1999 For sale by the U. Prining Office Superintendent of Documents, Congressinl Sales Otfice, Washington, DC 20402 ISBN 0-16-059967.9COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado, Chairman DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii, Vice Chairman FRANK MURKOWSKI. Alaska KENT CONRAD, North Dakota JOHN McCAIN, Arizon, HARRY REID, Nevada SLADE GORTON, Washington DANIEL K AKAKA, Hawait PETE V, DOMENICI, New Mexico PAUL WELLSTONE, Minnesota ming: BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma Pau MOOREHEAD Majority Staff Director /Chief Counsel Parnicia M. ZELL, Minority Staff Director /Chief Counsel aa)CONTENTS Page Statements Beaulieu, David, director, Office of Indian Education, Department of Edu- cation, Washington, DC 3 Campbeil, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U'S. Senator from Colorado, chairman, Committee on Indian Affairs 1 Charley, Wallace, council delegate, Shiprock, NM, vice chairman, Edu- cation Committee, Navajo Nation .. 16 Cheek, John, executive director, National Indian Education Association, Alexandria, VA ...... 18 Corwin, Thomas, acting deputy assistant secretary, Elementary and Sec- ondary Education, Department of Education, Washington, DC 3 Gish, John, president, National Indian Impacted School Ass Mahnomen, MN 19 Johnson, Judith, acting assistant secretary, Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Edueation, Washington, DC... 3 Kohlmoos, Jim, deputy assistant secretary, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Department of Education, Washington, DC 2 Tippeconni¢, John, Education Policy Studies, Pennsylvania State Univer- sity, College of Education, University Park, PA 21 Tortalita, Lloyd D., Governor, Pueblo of Acoma, Acoma Pueblo, NM 14 Wellstone, Hon. Paul, U.S. Senator from Minnesota 2 APPENDIX Prepared statements: ‘Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from Hawaii... 6) American Indian Higher Education Consortium 247 Charley, Wallace (with attachments) es BT Cheek, John (with attachments) ..... a Conrad, Hon. Kent, U.S. Senator from North Dakota 0000.0". 30 Gish, ‘John (with attachments) .... 98 Tnouye, Hon. Daniel K., U.S. Senator from ‘Hawaii, vice ‘chairman, ‘Com: mittee on Indian Affairs ... ere eer a Johnson, Judith (with attachments) = 31 McCoy, Melody, attorney, Native American Rights: Fund “with attach- ments) .... - 47 Tippeconnie, John (with attachments)... M3 Tortalita, Loyd D. (with attachments) 47 Wallace, A. Brian, chairman, Washoe Tribe 2 Nevada and California (with attachment) Sees Be 260 Additional material submitted for the reeord: Gomez, Robert, superintendent, Gallup-McKinley County Public Schools, Gallup, NM, letter... 255 Hale, Ronald, board president, Wide Ruins Comananity ‘School, Cham. bers, AZ, memorandum = ayELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ACT REAUTHORIZATION WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 27, 1999 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to other business, at 9:18 a.m. in room 485, Senate Russell Building, Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Senators Campbell, Inouye, Wellstone, and Gorton. STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, U.S. SEN- ATOR FROM COLORADO, CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON IN- DIAN AFFAIRS: The CHAIRMAN. Today we will receive testimony on the Indian ti- tles and provisions in the draft reauthorization for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act [ESEA]. Because of its broad jurisdiction and the many problems facing Indian country, this committee hears from the tribes on many issues, including housing, health care, gaming, road construction, and a host of other things. Nothing, in my mind, is more critical to the health and welfare of native communities than education. Since the issue of Indian education was the subject of a special committee in the 1960's, there has been progress made; but as we all know, we have a long way to go. Indian youngsters have high dropout rates, substandard academic achievement, alcohol abuse, substance abuse problems, teen pregnancy, and a host of other problems that are holding native people back from getting the kind of education needed that today's market and world demand. As a former teacher myself and as the chairman of this committee I be- lieve that, in the long run, education and particularly higher edu- cation holds the key to brighter futures for native people. I'll place the rest of my statement in the record but let me just go on to say that over the next couple of months we'll have the opportunity to scrutinize the bills that have been offered to reauthorize ESEA. My understanding is that Senator Jeffords, in his Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee does not expect to mark up the bill until early January of next year. But with that, we'll move forward. Senator Inouye, did you have a statement? Senator [NouyE. Mr. Chairman, I do have a statement but may I ask that it be made a part of the record? The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it will be done. [Prepared statement of Senator Inouye appears in appendix.] a2 The CHAIRMAN. Senator Wellstone. STATEMENT OF HON. PAUL WELLSTONE, U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA Senator WELLSTONE. Mr. Chairman, why don't we go on with the hearing? I do want you to know and Senator Inouye that I, as a member of the Health Committee, this is my background, and edu- cation, and will be very involved in this markup. I thought we were going to do it this fall, but you're right, we'll do it early next win- ter, and I look forward to working with my colleagues on this com- mittee to make sure that we do much better when it comes to edu- cation for Native American people. I couldn't agree with you more that, I mean that all of us have, some of us have been the direct beneficiaries of this and certainly all of us believe in it, that edu- cation is certainly part of the foundation of opportunity in our country, and I think in Indian country all too often—just look at the physical condition of some of the schools and the fact that quite often you don’t have the same qualified teachers, much less all the other kind of issues that young people have to deal with in their lives. I think this is the place that I think we can make the biggest difference, so I appreciate this hearing today and thank you for your work. The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate your input. Your background in education makes you very valuable to this committee, Senator Wellstone, and as you probably know, Indian schools—they don’t get State aid; they don’t get help from States; they are totally de- pendent on the Federal Government, particularly Bureau schools, and you've visited some of the them; I have, too, and they're pretty dilapidated, need a lot of help. Thank you. Senator WELLSTONE. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. With that, we'll start with the first panel. That would be Judith Johnson, acting assistant secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education from the Department of Education, ac- companied by Thomas Corwin, the acting deputy assistant sec- retary, Jim Kohlmoos, the deputy assistant secretary, and David Beaulieu, I believe that’s pronounced right, director the office of In- dian Education. With that, Ms. Johnson, why don’t you go ahead, please. Ms. JOHNSON. Good morning. The CHAIRMAN. Will you be making the only statement, or will your colleagues also be making statements? Ms. Jounson. I will be making the formal statement, but they will join me in the question and answer part. The CHAIRMAN. Fine.3 STATEMENT OF JUDITH JOHNSON, ACTING ASSISTANT SEC- RETARY FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, WASHINGTON, DC, ACCOM- PANIED BY THOMAS CORWIN, ACTING DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY; JIM KOHLMOOS, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SEC- RETARY, OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDU- CATION; AND DAVID BEAULIEU, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF IN- DIAN EDUCATION Ms. JOHNSON. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Vice Chairman, and members of the committee. Thank you very much for inviting me to talk today about the administration’s proposal for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, an act that we refer to as ESEA. In particular, I’d like to provide comment on two areas: The broad principles that frame the reauthorization of ESEA and, in particular, the programs for American Indians, Na- tive Hawaiians, and Alaskan Natives. My written statement has been submitted for the record The CHAIRMAN. Without objection that will be included. Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you. My oral comments will provide a sum- mary of that written statement. The themes in our reauthorization proposal are intended to continue the progress that our Nation's schools have already made in helping all students improve their academic performance. And we do that within our bill with a very specific emphasis on raising the level of achievement for our poor, minority, and educationally-disadvantaged students. Our proposal builds on the 1994 reauthorization that sought to ensure that all of our students, including American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaskan Natives, were taught to higher standards and all of them were held to higher expectations. American Indians and Alas- kan Natives have made progress in recent decades. As students they continue to disproportionately be affected by poverty, low edu- cational attainment, and as a consequence, have fewer educational opportunities than other students. While we are dedicated in this administration to improving educational opportunities for all stu- dents, we are particularly committed to improving educational op- portunities for our Native American students. To increase edu- cational excellence and equity, the administration's ESEA proposal, submitted in May, has six broad principles that I would like to take a few minutes to define for you. The first one is to continue the implementation of high standards in all of our classrooms. We made a major decision in the 1994 au- thorization to establish the notion of a standards-based reform agenda across the country. It has taken hold throughout the coun- try. We now know that in 48 of our States content standards are in place. A number of States are working to complete the final re- quirements in the 1994 authorization. The task now is to get high standards into every classroom in this country. The second major theme is to support positive learning environ- ments by reducing class size in the early grades, with the goal of helping every child to read well and for comprehension by the end of the third grade, and to acquire the basic mathematical skills needed to be successful in their subsequent school years. The third goal is one that we heard a great deal about as we traveled throughout the country collecting testimony for the prepa-4 ration of the 1999 reauthorization proposal. And that was to strengthen the quality of our teaching force and our instructional leadership. So the third goal is to strengthen teacher and principal quality in all of our schools. ‘The fourth principle is to emphasize accountability for school and student performance, including a major emphasis on turning around failing schools and toughening accountability in Federal education programs. No child should need to attend, or be required to attend, a failing school. The fifth principle is to provide safe, healthy, drug-free, and dis- ciplined learning environments that improve the partnerships be- tween students, teachers, families, and communities. And our sixth principle and goal is to modernize our schools for the 2ist century by putting useful, advanced technology in our classrooms, by making our schools more supportive and smaller for students, by increasing the opportunities for all of our students to learn foreign languages, and to expand the opportunities for learn- ing by offering after-school, extended school, and summer programs for all of our children. Each of these six goals supports State and local efforts that are aimed at improving the education for all students. We know that these themes will be of particular benefit to our Native American Indian students. Our proposal rejects the tyranny of low expecta- tions a deeply flawed assumption. We hold, instead, the belief that all of our students can be taught to high standards. All of our stu- dents includes Indian students. We give them, and need to give them, through this proposal, the resources and the services they need to meet these high standards. Better trained teachers, smaller classes, schools that are drug-free and safe, new schools through our school construction bill, and strengthened accountability provi- sions will benefit all students as we constantly strive to make our schools and our education system the best in the world. I'd like to move from the six principles and goals that frame the 1999 reauthorization proposal to the specifics of our proposals for Indian education, Native Hawaiian education, and Alaska Native education. Our reauthorization proposal for Indian education builds on the significant changes made in the previous authorization. We maintain the commitment to the Formula Grant Program, with its specific emphasis on improving the quality of instruction for Indian students. Additionally, our bill would maintain the flexible author- ization for special programs for Indian children. Through this au- thority we have just completed two competitions for early childhood programs and professional development programs. Our proposal for an American Indian Teacher Corps to hire 1,000 new Indian teach- ers in schools with concentrations of Indian students would be op- erated under the professional development authority. We are very optimistic about the impact that this program can have on the quality and quantity of Indian teachers. Finally, our bill would retain a broad national programs author- ity for research, development, evaluation, and data collection activi- ties. Our proposal would also repeal several of the unfunded au- thorizations contained in the current statute. Allow me to address this for 1 minute. As we looked across the 14 current ESEA titles, we made some decisions to eliminate redundant or unfunded au-5 thorities. Where the current legislation contains 14 titles, our new proposal contains 11 titles. Where we could find consolidations, we identified those consolidations. For example, in title IX, we shifted the gifted and talented authority into an allowable activity under the Formula Grant Program so as to provide benefits to as many Indian students as possible. I'd like to state very emphatically that we are not cutting back on any programs that are currently provid- ing services to Indian students. It is important that we continue to ensure that our legislation supports a comprehensive effort to im- prove educational opportunities for Indians. Our reauthorization proposals for the Native Hawaiian and Alaska Native programs are intended to ease the administration of those programs. This allows us to encourage and support implementation of innovative edu- cational strategies that are emerging from native educators in Ha- waii and Alaska. For the Native Hawaiian program we propose to merge the seven authorities into one comprehensive authority. That gives the Department the flexibility to fund creative, cross- cutting, innovative approaches to meeting the education and cul- tural needs of our Native Hawaiian students. Similarly, for the Alaska Native program we propose to merge three authorities into one comprehensive authority. T would like to emphasize the administration's opposition to the House Committee's action to repeal the Native Hawaiian program. This action fails to consider the unique educational and culturally related needs of the Native Hawaiian population. These are the very needs that these programs are intended to address. There is a special relationship that our country has with the Native Hawai- ian population. I was pleased to see that Senator Inouye and Sen- ator Akaka recently introduced their Native Hawaiian Education Reauthorization Act. It largely mirrors our proposal for reauthor- ization. It is encouraging that we have reached such agreement on this important program, and I believe it should be easy to work out the few differences that exist. Finally, I would point out that our reauthorization proposal is not the only effort we are making to improve educational opportu- nities for Indian students. On August 6, 1998, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13096, which cited the importance of im- proving educational achievement and academic progress for Amer- ican Indian and Alaska Native students and for reaching the goal of preparing every student for responsible citizenship, continued learning, and productive employment. This Executive order is an important step forward in addressing systemic and long-standing difficulties in meeting the unique needs of our American Indian and Alaska Native students. Through the Executive order a com- prehensive Federal Indian education policy will be established that can and will set the stage for important discussions surrounding the programs and services that we provide to American Indian and Alaska Native students. It will have a positive impact on the edu- cational achievement and the academic opportunities available to them. In closing, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to ap- pear before the committee. I look forward to engaging in a discus- sion with you around the reauthorization proposal, and my col- leagues and I look forward to answering any questions you may6 have about the reauthorization proposal and, in particular, about title IX. Thank you. [Prepared statement of Ms. Johnson appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. Let me ask you a cou- ple of things. You spoke about these different principles that you're now pursu- ing and one, you mentioned you will be taking testimony from the Indian community. I'm a little concerned about lack of good, solid information, measurable type information on student performance, faculty evaluation, standards, just to name a few. Will the research agenda of your office require program funds for the purposes of re- fans to find out these things, or are you going to need additional ‘unds Ms. JOHNSON. We now have the capacity to begin to explore and to engage in research on a much greater level than we've had in the past, but I'd like David to respond to that also. Mr. BeauLieu. Mr. Chairman. ‘The CHAIRMAN. Please identify yourself please for the record. Mr. BEAULIEU. David Beaulieu, Director of the Office of Indian Education. We currently have money within our national programs account for research, and we have requested an additional $1 mil- lion for a total of $1,735,000 to focus on research. The Executive order on American Indian education asked us to look at three major areas for research. One, establishing baseline data so that we actually have good solid information on how well we're doing nationally with regard to our efforts to improve Indian education. Second, to look at those practices, to understand exactly what is working and what is not working and to understand the reasons why and to inform practitioners about that kind of information. And then last to look at the impact of native language and culture in Indian education. As a response to that activity we have devel- oped a research strategy within the Department to begin to focus on how we are to meet those objectives. We, for example, are pro- posing the development of a national Indian educational research conference, to bring practitioners and researchers together to talk about specifically the kinds of questions we need to ask and to focus on Indian student needs. We'll have topic groups and others to begin to do that more fully. The CHAIRMAN. Well, Ms. Johnson, I laud your plan on trying to recruit and deploy 1,000 Indian teachers. Good luck, it’s a long- range goal because I don't think there are 1,000 available Indian teachers, very frankly, but I support that idea. One of the problems I believe we've had in Indian schools, particularly the on-reserva- tion ones, is that the youngsters kind of get caught between two cultures. You know, there’s a traditional way of teaching in the In- dian communities,’ you probably know. The traditional way, of course, before there were schools it was done by the grandfathers, the uncles, if it was a young boy, and the grandmothers and the aunts if it was a girl, and many things I've noticed being a former teacher myself as Senator Wellstone has, is that some of things that are taught are often in conflict with the traditional way of be- lieving. The traditional way, of course, was through a holistic meth- od of teaching where art and dance and music, religion, and all the other things were all part of learning. They weren't separated ora categorized like they are in the public school system and com- plicated with different laws about what you can or can’t do. I think sometimes in the past when teachers have come out on the reserva- tions, non-Indian teachers, they brought a different set of values, and many of them try very hard I think, but I know having been out there a lot of times there is a big disparity sometimes between what they're teaching youngsters and what the kids go home and are then told by their grandparents, and it creates a tremendous amount of confusion for the kids. [ think, although I don’t know for sure, but I would think that teachers who happen to be Indian or who are Indian would understand that very delicate kind of bal- ance between the styles of teaching and being able to do maybe a better job and certainly to try to reduce the dropout rate. But I just wanted to wish you luck on that and I hope that works—finding 1,000 new teachers. Ms. JOHNSON. Let me comment a bit on that. I've been with the administration for 2 years, but I’m a 30-year educator having spent of most career in New York State, starting as a classroom teacher and working my way up to district administration, so there are a number of thoughts I have in response to the comment you just made. If it is difficult to find 1,000 teachers, we need to work a little harder to identify them. We need to start with the pipeline and en- courage our Indian ae w think about teaching as a career so that we can fill that pipel On the cultural insensi ity, Fhat you feel some teachers bring to the classroom, that’s what I heard you say and I’ve seen that and experienced it. That's simply unacceptable in a country where in the next millennium we will have the most diverse student popu- lation ever. So teachers will need to acquire a cultural sensitivity and understanding about how you use the environment that a child comes from, how to use that as a launching point for introducing the academic language of the classroom. A really effective teacher uses both the academic language of the classroom and the cultural language of the student to ensure that there is success in class- room. So we are hoping that as we work with the universities to revamp our teacher education programs, they understand the im- portance of ensuring that our teachers are trained to be culturally sensitive to our diverse population. ‘The CHAIRMAN. Well, I appreciate that answer. You also did, as 1 understood your testimony, you mentioned the importance of lan- guage, too, and certainly Indian languages being lost with the ex- ception of a few of the big tribes. You can go out on reservations now or even 15 years ago and almost any youngster that’s under 20 could speak their own language because they were taught by the elders and it’s being lost. I would hope that in your agenda somewhere there’s also an emphasis on trying to retain those old languages before they're all gone. They're disappearing. I mean al- most daily they are disappearing, as you probably know. Ms. JOHNSON. Do you want us to comment on that? We do have a response to that. Mr. BEAULIEU. Senator and members of the committee, David Beaulieu.8 Yes, we are concerned. Our program particularly recognizes unique educational and culturally-related needs of American In- dian students, Alaska Native students, and of course, one of those unique needs js, in fact, language. The program seeks not only to enable educational environments to be congruent with Indian stu- dents’ language and culture, it seeks as a possibility that the schools address specifically the language development needs of In- dian students. The CHAIRMAN. Well, Ms. Johnson's testimony did state that con- sistent with general Administration policy, several unfunded gen- erally duplicative authorizations would be repealed, and I am won- derin; Ae at specific Indian programs are slated for elimination or repeal? Ms. Jounson. Why don’t I take you through the four that have been proposed for repeal and identify for you how the needs and intent of those statutes are still going to be retained? The first one is gifted and talented. Our current proposal would repeal the separate program and make gifted and talented pro- grams an allowable activity under the larger LEA Formula Grant. ‘e feel that incorporating gifted and talented programs into the larger formula programs would provide greater opportunities for Indians to participate in gifted and talented programs. So we iden- tified an existing source—both a legislative source and a fiscal source—for gifted and talented programs. The next one—there are four—the second one is Fellowships for Indian Students. We have decided that our students would be bet- ter served if we focused our efforts on building capacity of colleges and universities to provide support for Indian students, instead of funding the individuals specifically. So this is a move away from individual fellowships to supporting the capacity of colleges and universities to provide support for all of our Indian students. It would also allow us to create an Indian teacher core. This strategy builds institutional capacity. Instead of providing funds only to in- dividual students and hoping that the colleges will provide the sup- port services and other activities needed to help those students suc- ceed, we believe that it is appropriate to help the institutions pro- vide both the student support and the additional services. The third area where we are proposing a repeal is grants to tribes for educational administrative planning and development. We do that because there is a comparable authority within the Bu- reau of Indian Affairs [BIA]. We are reviewing this area and in the future may wish to provide funding for it, but we don’t need redun- dant authorities in order to support the tribal departments of edu- cation, ‘And the fourth one is the special programs related to adult edu- cation for Indians. Our proposal eliminates authorities that have not been used or are redundant with other existing authorities, but it does retain the authorizations for improving educational opportu- nities for Indian children and professional development. The im- provement of educational opportunities section aliows for a signifi- cant number of projects to improve the educational opportunities and achievement of Indian children. The professional development section allows for pre-service and in-service training in professions that serve American Indian people, including the educationally-re-9 lated professions. The professional development programs can meet some of the post-secondary and graduate level training needs for American Indians. The authority, unlike the fellowship program, qualifies an institution rather than an individual, so it’s our feeling at this program approach provides the greatest student support Pos bites and increases the potential for success for our stu- lents. So those are the four areas that have been recommended for re- peal, but in each instance we've identified an existing authority that would be able to cover the same series of activities. The CHAIRMAN. Well, I certainly hope that you’ve identified a very strong program that can cover that because those all seem to be pretty important areas, particularly adult education. Senator Tnouye and I have both spent a lot of time visiting reservations and the adult education program in the little Indian community col- leges, for instance, is extremely important. There is a much bigger percent of people who have started a family and then want to come back to school under some adult education program on the reserva- tion and off the reservations, Without those existing adult edu- cation programs that are being administered there simply wouldn't be an opportunity for many of those people who are non-traditional types of students; that is, they didn't finish school or get a GED, and they want to come back as adults. They simply wouldn't be able to, without some adult education programs, so I hope you move along very carefully on that and make sure that there are not only adequate resources but a real commitment to take up the slack by the other agencies that you think will be able to service the communities. Ms. JOHNSON. It is also our hope that the eligible tribes and trib- al entities will apply directly to the States for the funds that are made available under the Adult Education Act. We know that there were several entities currently receiving funds under that act. ‘The CHAIRMAN. Those funds were available but I can tell you for sure that it’s like pulling teeth to get the States to send any money to those Indian schools. States generally think it’s a Federal re- sponsibility, our responsibility here, and they are very reluctant to do it. It's very difficult to get State money onto the reservation for tribal schools. Mr. Corwin. Could I add a little on that? I’m Thomas Corwin. We agree with you completely and I think, in fact, the history in the adult education State program has been that most of the money went to the local school districts—that is who the States were most comfortable with. That made not just the Indian entities but community-based organizations, community colleges, and oth- ers, kind of unhappy because they had a lot te offer in adult edu- cation, They got the law changed back in about 1991 so that the States can no longer just do it the old way; they now have to give everybody equitable access, take the best applications and give the money to the neediest areas. We've seen some progress on that but I think, like you say, we need to keep working with the States so they understand what they should be doing here. The CHAIRMAN. I know that even little schools, those 2-year col- leges, for instance, even the ones that get accredited by the State so that they can transfer to units from that school to one of the10 State universities or colleges, even they have difficulty getting their fair share of any grant money. Ms. Johnson, just one last question before I ask Senator Inouye for some comments and that is one of the problems that the Indian schools face is that they have inadequate resources. I’ve visited a lot of them. They have broken down computers and the type of equipment, is just not state-of-the-art technology that you would find in most outside schools. Is the administration making any pro- posal, even in a pilot project, that would bring things like Internet or library services or access to speakers’ bureaus, something of that nature, online so that they could use that or any other high tech tools that normal schools now have a pipeline into? Ms. JOHNSON. I a ap with you that it’s deplorable. The CHAIRMAN. These schools, many times, are hundreds of miles from a metropolitan area, and in some places they're even 100 miles from the nearest town. And so the isolation alone of some of the Indian schools makes it much more difficult to get the same kind of high technology instruction that people can avail them- selves of in a bigger community. Mr. Konumoos. Mr. Chairman, I’m Jim Kohlmoos from the De- partment of Education. On this whole issue of technology and dis- tance learning and gaining access to the Internet, particularly for Indian schools, and schools funded by the BIA, the BIA’ has launched a rather aggressive effort to wire schools through this Net Day concept. They've now conducted two Net Days and you might want to ask our friends from the BIA, in the education office there, about what they've been doing. I've participated in one in particu- lar at a Pueblo in New Mexico. It was very very impressive what they've been able to do even in a small Bureau-funded school in the middle of New Mexico. When you were talking earlier about this effort to kids living in two worlds. well, technology allows that mi- ‘ation back and forth in a very effective fashion between the tra- litional world and the modern, 21st century world. I think we all agree that technology provides a vehicle for building that bridge a The CHaIRMAN. Senator Inouye, did you have questions or com- ments? Senator INouye. Yes; thank you very much. Ms. Johnson, I appreciate your statement. As you may know, I've been on this committee now for about three decades, and during that time I've heard your predecessors provide us with statements of great promise and hope, but in every event we have found that these promises come to naught because of the lack of funding. Here we have received a statement that suggests certain programs should be eliminated because of no funding. That reminds me of a program, which is not in your jurisdiction, tribal colleges. The au- thorization that we hopefully passed would authorize $6,000 per Indian student in tribal colleges. The highest we have ever been able to do is $2,900. That's the highest we have ever achieved. It’s usually less than $2,000. The question here is should we repeal that law and just be realistic and say “we'll give you $3,000 per capita” because since its inception we have never gone up to $6,000 and yet we will agree that these colleges are important. Second, as the chairman indicated, there are a lot of funds available through11 our States, but for one reason or another they are not made avail- able to Indian nations. For example, under the provision of Federal law, I believe it’s 20 U.S.C. somewhere, in fact, eight States need not allocate these funds to all educational activities and in some cases they just cut out certain educational activities. And it just happens that most of them are Indians. So here we have a Federal program, Impact Aid, that is supposed to be distributed to all the school children, but because of certain provisions in the law, very cleverly the States can say, “Yes, we'll use it here, but not there. And “there” is usually an Indian reservation. Now would the Ad- ministration be in favor of repealing this law that would authorize States to reduce its funding through schools that educate Indian children? Ms. Jounson. I would like to take part of that question, and then ask Tom Corwin to take the Impact Aid piece. You started by saying that each of my predecessors offered great promises that appear not to have been met. And I think I men- tioned in my opening comments that we can’t afford to leave one child behind; that this 1994 legislation put us on the slate and on the radar screen as saying that every child needed to make aca- demic success. We have become a lot more research based and data driven, so we do look at data to see whether all of our populations are doing well and we do look at the data around our Indian children to see whether or not they are performing well. In preparing for this testimony, I too was curious about the dol- lar allocations and the funding Sources available to support Amer- ican Indian children. And they come in two categories. There are direct supports through the funds that we provide, particularly in money that is transferred to the BIA, and there are also indirect supports. You know 90 percent of our Indian children are in public schools and many, an overwhelmingly disproportionate number as a matter of fact, are eligible for free and reduced lunch. That makes them generate funding for all of the programs that target poverty children in our ESEA. And we are really dedicated and seeking to insure that as schools look at improving student achievement, they tease out or disaggregate their data so they can take a look at the success of American Indian children. So, while I won't go through the litany of all the funds available, I did want, very much to make sure that I could say to you today that we do have title I funds supporting our Indian children. We do have tech- nology funds supporting our Indian children, and we also have funds that go directly to the BIA. Now, on the Impact Aid issue, I would like Tom Corwin, who really knows this extremely well, to try to answer that question for you. Senator INouYE. Before we go there, I concur with you fully. I think for the most part in Indian country, funding is from the Fed- eral Government. We have funds available through the States, which we assume would be used for all children in their jurisdic- tion, but it doesn’t happen. So, it may be available, and the chil- dren may be eligible, but that’s just in the law, there are no funds for them.12 Mr. Corwin. I would also add a little to what Ms. Johnson said about the funding. We have stood with the Indian education pro- gram over these years. As you may recall, in 1995, we almost lost all the funds. We had a recommendation from the House Appro- priations Committee to cut it down to $1 million, as a 1-year phase out, and we worked hand in hand with the National Indian Edu- cation Association to turn that around. We were successful, but at a loss of quite a bit of the appropriation that we have been trying to restore since then. The Chairman mentioned the Indian Teacher Corps proposal and the research on Indian education. We have strong recommenda- tions for funding them in Fiscal 2000, and the Senate was good enough to put them in their bill. The House didn’t, so we are still struggling on that one, but we agree with you: We would like to make these promises with some confidence that the money is going to be there, but you can't always depend on it. With regard to the Impact Aid program, there is the provision, generally, that the States cannot wack the money out from their own formulas to account for the Impact Aid money that is coming into the school districts. There is one loophole there, and we agree that there are some problems with it. The loophole occurs when the State is considered equalized under the law, meaning that it meets the tests for insur- ing that all its school districts, whatever their property wealth, can provide roughly equal education measured in per student funding. ‘hen, the State can back that money out. I guess the feeling of the Congress was, if you didn’t allow that, you would interfere with State equalization: The problem in some States is that the basic level is very low. I think you have compelling testimony coming up on that later this morning from some school districts where they may be equalized but they are operating at a very low level and cannot provide an effective education. We agree with that. We wouldn't say, “throw out the whole thing.” We have provisions in our bill to require them to be funding education at at least 80 percent of the national level per-people expenditure. And we strongly hope that the Con- gress will accept those recommendations because we agree with you, it is a problem. Senator INOUYE. The other matter that concerns me, whenever I see the words, “consolidate” or “to merge,” is usually followed by a rather drastic cut in funding. “Brings about efficiency,” those are terms used. I would hope that we keep in mind that over the years for one reason or another, we have not fully lived up to the obliga- tions we have on the treaties and under the law. It is one thing to say we are going to do it; another thing to say there are loop- holes in the law. A few moments ago, while you were sitting there waiting to tes- tify, we had an executive session to mark up a bill. It was a bill to provide among other things, contract support costs. As a matter of policy, the government of the United States decided that it would be better for all entities concerned if Indian country assumed these responsibilities of governance; self-determination, self-govern- ment. And so we told Indian country, “you do that, and we will pro- vide you with necessary funds to hire nurses, hire doctors, et13 cetera, et cetera.” Now, we have a situation, where this is going to be up to the Congress of the United States. Yes, we made a prom- ise that you take over the reins, we'll supply you with money, but, then it has to come through appropriations, which may come down to nothing, and therefore we wanted to make it a sort of entitle- ment. Would you be in favor of considering education as an entitle- ment program for Indian country? Ms. Jorinson. I think that public education is the civil right of every child in this country. I think all of our children are entitled to an efficient, effective, high quality educational experience. I think that that has to be done as part of a partnership, with the Federal Government, States, and local districts, because as we all know the authority for establishing educational systems really does reside at the State and local level. But it is a civil right. And it is one that we must keep in mind. 1 want to respond to the concern you have about the possible loss in funding. I want to reassure you that, as one of the senior offi- cials that helped to construct the ESEA proposal, we always had before ourselves a set of questions as we looked at the areas that we were going to recommend for possible repeal. And there was one very important question: Was this service and or activity available elsewhere, and were the funds available to support it? If the an- swer was yes, then we decided to eliminate something that was re- dundant, but we under no circumstances, in any instance, elimi- nated or recommended for repeal a program that could not be sup- ported in some other area. So, it was an attempt to be efficient, an attempt to use our funds well, and an attempt to assure Congress that we understood the importance of using our funds around a common or shared mission, and that we could take on the task our- selves, of assuring that we were looking for evidences of redun- dancy, and where we found them we would eliminate them, but we did not in any way reduce the funding available in any of these programs. Senator INouYE. Ms. Johnson, you can count on my help. I will do everything I can to help you in your program. I join you in my commitment to your six programs, because they are very essential, not just to Indians but to all children in this land. So, I commend you for the effort you are making. But, I hope you will understand, it is frustrating sitting here, year after year, but I hope that this may be the step that we will finally take. Ms. JOHNSON. We think that we have to win this. We are enter- ing a new millennium. We cannot leave a child behind. We feel that we have put the right principles in place, we have developed a budget that we think is honorable, and we are really going to stand tall and fast on this one. Senator INouYE. Thank you very much. Ms. JOHNSON, Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. I think this is the first time that you have appeared before this committee, isn’t it? Ms. JOHNSON. Yes; it is. The CHAIRMAN. Well, all good actions start with a good heart and I want to tell you that I think your commitment, and understand- ing, and empathy, for the problems we have in Indian country for our children are real and sincere and I really appreciate your help,14 as Senator Inouye does. I don’t know what your schedule is, but we a rrrrs—~s—sCs«sCssC=Csg. panel, but if any of the four of you have the time to stay, you might be interested in what the next panel is going to say, because I know we are going to have some very interesting points. So with that, thank you very much. ‘Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, and my colleagues will be staying. The CHAIRMAN. With that, we will go to the next panel which will be: Lloyd Tortalita, Governor of the Pueblo of Acoma; Wallace Charley, council delegate from the Navajo Nation; John Cheek, ex- ecutive director of the National Indian Education Association; Brent Gish, the president of the National Indian Impacted School Association, John Tippeconnic, from the Educational Policies Stud- ies, Pennsylvania State University When we do our panels in front of this committee, I might tell you that we give a little more latitude to administration panels in terms of time, but since we do have limited time, we do ask other panels if they would limit their time. And we remind them with this little clock up there, so you have about 7 minutes to condense your verbal testimony. All of your written testimony will be intro- duced in the record. Mr. Tortalita. STATEMENT OF LLOYD D. TORTALITA, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO OF ACOMA, ACOMA PUEBLO, NM Mr. Torta.ita. [Remarks given in native tongue.]} Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good morning again. My name is Gov- ernor Lloyd Tortalita. I am from Pueblo of Acoma, and I want to make sure that the committee understands and knows who I am. It's good to be coming before the committee. I am Governor of Pueblo of Acoma and I will let you know that I have served 6 years on the Head Start program at my local schools as the parent-policy- council-chairman, so I do know Head Start. I served 8 years, no 9 years, on the local BIA operating school boards. I served 8 years ‘on the local public school board. Also, I am on leave from my job at the Johnson O'Malley Higher Education and Adult Education Program Director for my tribe. My testimony is going to be based on Impact Aid, around Impact Aid. As we all know, 90 percent of our Native American Students attend public schools. About 2 percent attend parochial schools and private schools. Anywhere from 6 to 8 percent attend BIA operated schools. Pueblo of Acoma has both public schools, and we have a BIA operated school on our reservation. My council, and I as the Governor, support both schools. But having recently served as a public school board member, I am a bit concerned on how Impact Aid is distributed in the State of New Mexico. Currently, and in the past, 95 percent of the Impact Aid was taken credit by the State of New Mexico, and was shared among 88 school districts, there are 89 school districts in the State of New Mexico. Five percent of it came to our local public schools in itself; 95 percent, the State took credit for. Eighty-eight school districts shared the Impact Aid dollars that came into the State of New Mexico. One schoo] district, Los Alamos School District, kept 10015 percent of the Impact Aid money. I can never understand why Los Alamos students were better than the Acoma students or any of the Native American students in Acoma. But Los Alamos is a heav- ily impacted Department of Defense area. A lot of our concern, and my concern is this: 95 percent goes into general operating funds. ‘The leadership in the community was discussing school construc- tion going through the process of building a new high school. We don’t have funds to build a new high school. The current high school we have was built in the early 1960's, and was built as a middle school. But we were overcrowded and we were forced to put our high school students in it. And currently it is about 90 percent Laguna and Acoma students, and 10 percent of non-Indians in the school district. But the situation of not having other Impact Aid in the 815 con- struction moneys available any more, we are having a problem of trying to construct a new school. We are trying to address that por- tion, and a lot of those dollars are going into general funding; and “general” transportation and general education should be taken care of by the State of New Mexico. And we believe that we also need to have adequate safe schools like the Bureau of Indian Affairs schools for our native Indian American students that are attending public schools. Currently, in 1999, the State has ‘allowed us to take 20 percent, extra credit now for Impact Aid. So right now the current split of 75 percent still goes to the State, 25 percent comes to the local school district. We are still asking for 100 percent of it. ‘And talking about equality, the equality of how this operates, I already mentioned Los Alamos school district, where they take 100 percent of Impact Aid. And currently 33 school districts are very eavily impacted by Impact Aid. Currently there is a lawsuit in place in the State of New Mexico, which involves Zuni public schools, Gallup/McKinley County schools, and Cibola County schools, which I am a part of. And the reason for that is because, over school construction moneys, and over equality. But we need ‘to cut, or allow the school districts that are heavily impacted to take, and get all the dollars that they can to help us educate our young Indian students in our school dis- triets. Let me give you an example, in the city of Albuquerque, Albu- querque public schools, they are bonded to only about 13 percent capacity, while the schools districts, Cibola County schools, Galluy McKinley County schools, are bonded to 100 percent capacity. We don’t have any other means of raising dollars and when these Im- pact dollars are taken away from us, we cannot adequately do what we should be doing. And I wish everybody could come out to the State of New Mexico, come to the school district of Zini public schools, come to the Gal- Jup/McKinley public schools, come to Cibola County schools, and look at the facilities that we house our young individual Native American Acoma and Laguna students in. It is a shame that we do this to our own young people. I wouldn't want to go to school. I went to a public school in Albuquerque; but I’ve had to, because os other choice, send my students to attend Grants public schools.16 And we have proposed that section 8009 be eliminated from the next, or the reauthorization, because it will eliminate the problem that we are having with equality because it only affects three States now; only Alaska, Kansas, and New Mexico take credit for Impact Aid doilars. All the other States here in the United States do not take credit, they give 100 percent to their school districts. And this will allow us to close up some of the loopholes that are there. Earlier, there was mentioned of bilingual education. And I also, make the committee aware that that, it has been mentioned that Johnson-O’Maliey and title IX moneys provide duplicate services. It is not true in the State of New Mexico because a lot of our John- son-O’Malley dollars are expended at the local level, and most of our schools are anywhere from 18 miles, to at least 75 miles away from the local public schools. Title IX moneys are utilized within the school settings, within the school buildiags, within the school districts. We need to make that known, because like I said, 90 percent of Native American stu- dents go to the public schools. Also, currently in the State of New Mexico, we are going through compact negotiations. Pueblo of Acoma has laid on the table, a ar- rangement that 25 percent go to local government entities, and the local government enti that Acoma is talking about is our local public schools, which will help us come up with a new high school for our local Pueblo. Any iurther questions later on, i will be glad to answer. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for allowing me to come before because I have always been told as a JOM director, as an education director; but I am just a director, and I come here as I have been told that only Congress will listen to tribal leaders. So now I come before you as a tribal leader and hope my words are taken, are taken very seriously, and my written testimony has been provided to you. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify. {Prepared statement of Mr. Tortalita appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. We appreciate your being here. It is unfortunate that only some Congress nee ‘your concerns. Mr. TorTALiTA. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. We will go on to Wallace Charley. STATEMENT OF WALLACE CHARLEY, COUNCIL DELEGATE, SHIPROCK, NM, VICE CHAIRMAN, EDUCATION COMMITTEE, NAVAJO NATION Mr. CHarLEy. Good morning, Mr, Chairman, honorable members of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, My name is Wallace Char- ley. Tam a member of the Navajo tribal council, serving as the vice chairman of the Education Committee, and recently have, also, served on New Mexico's State legislature as State Representative, also served on their education committee. Mr. Chairman, honorable members of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, the Navajo Nation appreciates this opportunity to tes- tify under Title 20, Subchapter VIII, Impact Aid and Title IX, of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Mr, Chairman, the Navajo Nation has submitted the written tes- timony, and I would like to mention that, for the record, the Navajo17 Nation would like to recommend the repeal of Impact Aid, 20 U.S.C., subsection 7701. This allows States to take credit for Fed- eral Impact Aid funds, reduce State financial aid to the local edu- cation agencies on the basis of reciptance of Impact Aid funds from the Federal Government. Members of the committee, this provision has made Navajo schools to face economic hardship, of not providing adequate facili- ties and educational services to Navajo students. Currently, the State of Arizona has ceased its retention of Impact Aid, since the middle 1990’s, when the local educational agencies serving the Navajo Nation challenged the State of Arizona’s equalization for- mula. The State of New Mexico continues to create a negative im- pact to providing effective educational services. For example, the Gallup/McKinley County school district in Western New Mexico, which covers 5,000 square miles and is the largest district in the continental United States, with the enrollment of 15,000 students of which 75 percent are Native Americans and 15 percent Hispanic. Of the total enrollment of the students, 55 percent of the students are Navajos, who live on the Navajo Nation. In the 1996-97 school year, the Gallup/McKinley County district was eligible to receive 18.9 million dollars of Impact Aid basic sup- port funds. But, including the equalization formula levels in the State of New Mexico, the school district only received $948,000 of basic support funds. The negative effects impact the welfare of Navajo students who are intended to be the beneficiaries of the Im- pact Aid, which they generate. Navajo students in Gallup/McKinley County schools in New Mexico, on a daily basis, go to school, now in the old dilapidated school facilities, which the school district simply cannot afford to replace, renovate, or even adequately main- tain. Our Navajo students spend their days in classrooms contained in 225 portable buildings, while in surrounding communities, the students enjoy more modern facilities. The supposed equalization of revenue expenditure set forth in Impact Aid, implemented in the State of New Mexico, has never re- sulted in the true equalization of revenue or expenditure for Navajo students, and continues to deny Navajo students equity in edu- cational facilities and services. In this great country of ours, mem- bers of the committee, across the United States, average per pupil expenditures are approximately $6,100, but in this same amount, New Mexico school district is less than $3,500. In regards to Title IX of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, the Navajo Nation is at a critical juncture in development of the educational system within Navajo Indian country. The growth of tribally controlled contract or Grant school system within the Navajo Nation, as well as at the State level, including the estab- lishment of charter schools in the State of Arizona. The Navajo Na- tion is supportive of the maintenance of all currently authorized programs set forth in title IX, of ESEA. While some of the programs continue in title IX, they have not fully been funded, including provision relative to the establishment of tribal departments of education. The purpose and objective set forth in these programs continue to be very important in the de- liver of education and education related services to Navajos.18 Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, the Navajo Nation is Pleased to see that the draft of the proposed Senate version of title IX reauthorization legislation maintains the existing programs with Indian education. The Navajo Nation has provided several recommendations to title IX. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity to provide this tes- timony to this committee. The Navajo Nation appreciates its par- ticipation in the legislative process on getting it to a government- to-government basis and will continue to monitor and address the ESEA amendments, as the legislations are considered in both Houses of Congress. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. [Prepared statement of Mr. Charley appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. Thank you for your testimony. We will next hear from Mr. John Cheek. STATEMENT OF JOHN CHEEK, EXECUTIVE DiRECTOR, NA- TIONAL INDIAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION, ALEXANDRIA, VA Mr. CHEEK. Good morning Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman Inouye. On behalf of the National Indian Education Association, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to present testimony on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, specifically title IX. I am a member of the Muscogee Creek Nation from Oklahoma and I have been involved in Indian education for about 20 years. I have had the distinct opportunity of working with almost every sub-part program within title IX over the past few years and have even been an adult education instructor, so I know what impact that these programs can have. NIEA Tally ‘Supports retaining all existing authorizations under title IX. We feel that the need to eliminate these authorizations is really a step backward. I know that Assistant Secretary Judith Johnson mentioned that, “we cannot afford to leave one child be- hind.” I think the move to eliminate these programs would unfortu- nately do that, and also would leave behind many Indian adults. NIEA just held its 30th annual convention last week in Okla- homa City, and at that convention we did pass a resolution in sup- port of retaining all existing authorizations under title IX. Also I wanted to mention to Senator Inouye that the membership did approve an amendment to our constitution that would allow Native Hawaiians to be general voting members of NIEA, in line, in equal with American Indians and Alaska Natives in this coun- try. So, welcome aboard as an official indigenous population, as least in NIEA’s perspective. As far as we know, this is the first organiza- tion that has actually taken this first step forward, and we look forward to working with the Native Hawaiians on different issues. In regards to some of the other items, H.R. 2, that is being ad- ministered through the House right now, also eliminates title IX authorizations. We feel this is not the right move. I used to work with the National Advisory Council on Education, which is a presi- dentially appointed commission. We had the opportunity to review applications that would come in for funding under that authority, and in any given year there would be approximately 5,000-10,000 adult Indians participating in that program. The last year for fund-19 ing for adult education was 1995, and during that same time pe- riod, funding within the BIA for Adult Education was cut in half. So, we are not really sure how Indian adults are being able to take adult education programs. We know that there is less than one-half the amount of money available now than there was even 5 and 6 years ago. So, we feel that Indian education really needs to remain intact. The title IX program really was based out of the 1968-69 Senate report that Senator Bobby Kennedy did. He conducted a na- tionwide review of the educational status of American Indians and Alaska Natives in this country. What he found was pretty deplor- able. Dropout rates of 100 percent were pretty common across the Nation, especially in reservation areas. Title IX was an answer to this problem, in the country and in Indian country, specifically. We feel that title IX really, exemplifies the government to government relationship with the Federal Government. And to see parts of it being eliminated and cut, really, I am taking it personally, I guess, because I worked on so many of the programs and I see all of the benefits that it can do with people at the local level. And I’m not sure how many of the previous panel have actually worked in the Indian country with some of these programs but I have, and I know the benefits that they can bring to Indian communities, so I would urge the committee's support in keeping these programs intact. ith that, I can’t really think of much more to reiterate other than we feel that these programs need to remain a part of the In- dian Education Act. Saying that the States could probably assume some of the responsibilities, I think, is thinking in the wrong direc- tion. American Indians, regardless of whether they are at the res- ervation setting or in public schools have a Federal or government to government relationship with the Federal Government, and these programs really exemplify that, so if they are going to be cut, we just don’t think ‘that that is the right avenue to take at this point in time. And I would also mention that in 1997, the appro- priations for Title IX used to fall, or prior to 1979, funding author- ity for the Office of Indian Education was held within the Interior Appropriations Bill. It is now under the Labor Health and Human Services Appropriations line item. And since then, it seems that the programs that we care most about are the ones that are really being affected. So, I am not sure if that has a basis on the reau- thorization of the funding levels for these programs, but I would just caution that we cannot move toward into the next century with one adult or one Indian child left behind. So, with that I would just, I think, go ahead and close my com- ments and I would be happy to answer any questions the commit- tee might have. Thank you. [Prepared statement of Mr. Cheek appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. We will have some questions. Thank you. Mr. Gish. STATEMENT OF BRENT GISH, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL INDIAN IMPACTED SCHOOL ASSOCIATION, MAHNOMEN, MN Mr. Gis. Mr. Chairman, members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, thank you for this opportunity to come before you. My name is Brent Gish, I am an enrolled member of the White Earth Band of the Minnesota Chippewa Tribe and have served on20 the tribal council as well. For the past 27 years, 1 have served as a public school educator. I have served as an elementary teacher, as an elementary principal and am currently the superintendent of schools in Mahnomen school district. Mahnomen is a typical public school in Minnesota, which receives Federal Impact Aid. The Im- pact Aid is generated by the Federal presence on our tribal and trust property. Those dollars go to provide basic programs and staff members for the programs that we provide in our school system from birth to adult; from early childhood to community education, very very basic programs, The National Impacted Schools Associa: tion is an association, which represents over 700 schools nation- wide. It serves the students that reside on over nearly 100 million acres of land that is tribal in trust as well as Native Alaskan lands. As it has been pointed out already, we serve nearly 90 percent of American Indian students in this Nation. Indian impacted schools generate over 300 million in Impacted Aid, and on this committee, on this Senate committee, over $330 million go to the States that each of you represent. My comments would be in the area of both the Impact Aid, as well as construction. We, the National Association of Indian Im- pacted Schools, as well as the National Association of Federally Im- pacted Schools, which would bring in military schools as well, do not believe that the current law is broken. But we do believe that it needs to be fine-tuned. As is already been cited by Mr. Tortalita and Mr. Charley, there are areas in which there are gross inequi- ties. T would speak to first the area of equalization. We support their efforts to eliminate that portion of the law. Currently, only three States, this has all already been cited, only three States exercise that opportunity. Alaska, New Mexico, and Kansas, however, it is an item that is occasionally discussed by other States. The intent of the law is to bring equity to the school. systems that are affected by the Federal presence. In the case of New Mexico, as much as 95 percent of those dollars that are generated by those students go Ae age ear ee ee supplement the budget in that State. That is certainly not the intent of that law. The intent is to provide equal opportunity in all areas from technology to just the basic programs that our children so dearly need. The issue of accountability occasionally comes up and has been mentioned in the President’s recommendations. We believe that we currently have an accountability rogram in place through Indian Policies and Procedures, it is called IPPs. Under current law, we hold hearings with Indian arents, as well as are held accountable by our school boards locally, many times of whom are all Indian school boards as well. And so we believe that the Indian Policies and Procedures adequately address the issue of accountability. The issue of construction is one that is glaring out there. Over 65 percent of the buildings on Indian impacted schools are over 20 years old and of that group, over 38 percent are over 30 years old. They lack the infrastructure, in many cases, for technology. They lack adequate space. Many times we have gone to temporary facili- ties just to be able to provide basic classroom space temporary in the sense of sometimes this has gone 10 and 20 and even 30 years to house unhoused Indian children here.21 There are a number of bills that are currently in Congress. We support these efforts. We believe that the Baucus-Hagel bill has some real merits but we would ask that there be provisions for those schools that are 100 percent impacted by Federal presence. In other words, they lack the ability to bond or levy for the pur. poses of construction. In those cases, those school districts are to- tally dependent on the efforts outside, either State or Federal. And we believe that it is probably going to need a combination—a col- laborative effort which would be local, State, and Federal to ade- quately address those needs. We also recognize that Impact Aid is really not an area that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs would normally address. What we would ask though, is that you support our efforts and make rec- ommendation to the Senate Education Committee as well as Fi- nance, to address the areas that we have touched on this morning. in, on behalf of the National Association of Indian Impacted Schools, I thank you for this opportunity and would welcome the opportunity to respond to any questions that you may have. {Prepared statement of Mr. Gish appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. We will finish this committee with John Tippeconnic, but before you speak, Doctor, I understand your 8-year-old son is here in the audience. Is that the handsome young man that was over here in the front row? Mr. TIPPECONNIC. Yes Sir. The CHAIRMAN. Well, we wish him all the best. [ hope he grows up to play ball with Gil Paterno, and later becomes the chair of this committee and, but even more important than that is being a good citizen and learning to be an effective person in your tradi- tional world and the new modern world, high-tech communications through education. Thank you. Go ahead with your testimony. STATEMENT OF JOHN TIPPECONNIC, EDUCATION POLICY STUDIES, PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY PARK, PA Mr. TipPECONNIC. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for those comments. I do appreciate them and he does too. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice Chairman, I would like to thank you for inviting me to testify today. It is really an honor for me to come before you to talk about American Indian education, and I will Hit iy remarks, primarily to the reauthorization of ESEA and title IX. ‘As we all know, there has been progress in the education of American Indians and Alaska Natives over the past 30 years or so. As John Cheek mentioned, the 1969 Senate Special Subcommittee on Indian Education report, known as the Kennedy Report, rec- ommended a comprehensive piece of legislation be enacted in Con- gress to meet the educational needs of American Indians and Alas- ka Natives. The Indian Education Act of 1972, along with other pieces of legislation, other initiatives, and the hard and dedicated work of many people, including Indian people, helped to bring about this Progress Today, there are many things that are going well in schools for Indian students. We know that more parents are involved in the education of their children. We know there are more Indian teach-22 ers, more Indian administrators, counselors, professors, and other educators. We know that more of the curriculum reflects tribal cul- tures languages, and histories. There is a growing body of Indian education research. And there is more tribal control of education with over 30 tribal colleges and over 110 tribally controlled schools. However, as we all know, we are not where we want to be. There continues to be far too many students that are not doing well in our schools. We just have to look at some national reports, like the Indian Nations at Risk Report in 1991, the White House Con- ference in 1992, the Comprehensive Policy Statement on Indian Education in 1997, the Executive order in 1998, and the reports of NCES. And we see the data that reflects the difficulty that we have. We continue to have high dropout rates; low academic achieve- ment; lack of parent involvement; a lack of culturally relevant edu- cation; alcohol and substance abuse problems, the need for more Indian teachers, more administrators, more counselors, more pro- fessors and other educators. Much needs to be done. It is critical that the Indian Education Act, Indian Education Provisions of ESE be reauthorized intact. I would like to emphasize to the committee that the education of American Indians and Alaska Natives takes place in a very dif- ficult and complex environment today, Providing quality education is not easy, and continues to present difficult challenges when you consider the diversity among tribes, the roles and responsibilities of the local, State, tribal, and national governments. The complex- ity is further compounded by the historical, political, economic, health, and social factors that also influence how Indian students learn and how they are taught in schools. All this points to the need to address Indian education from a comprehensive and col- laborative viewpoint. Strategies are needed that are based on _re- search, best practices, consultation, and respect and acknowledge- ment for the Federal responsibility in Indian education, and the Federal policy of tribal self-determination in Indian education. I suggest that the reauthorization of the ESEA, maintain and strengthen its comprehensive and broad-based approach to meeting the wide array of educational needs of American Indians and Alas- ka Natives by providing opportunities at all levels, from early childhood to graduate school including adult education. This com- prehensive approach has been the strength of title IX from the be- ginning, when the Indian Education Act was passed in 1972. This comprehensive approach provided opportunities and the necessary flexibility for students, schools, tribes, Indian organizations, insti- tutions, colleges, and universities to provide services to meet local educational needs. In my opinion, a fundamental change will be made, in title IX, if programs, as has been proposed, are eliminated from the law. It is a shame that, in recent years, budget requests and appropria- tions did not support the comprehensive vision of the authorizing committees in Congress, A lack of appropriated funds does not mean that needs to not exist in Indian education. A comprehensive approach is necessary to continue our success in Indian education. So, I oppose the Department's elimination of programs. And I think the rationale that they use of integrating and having other pro-23 grams pick up the need is the faulty one. If we look back at inte- gration of programs, when we talk about a larger context, most often Indian education concerns are not a priority and go to the bottom, and they just don’t surface. Indian education needs are not. met in an integrated approach. I strongly recommend that research be emphasized and promoted in the reauthorization as well. Research is critical today, given the national emphasis on accountability, quality, results, standards, and student assessment. More importantly, research is essential to the improvement of teaching and learning, including student aca- demic achievement. We must keep and strengthen the national re- search activity section of the law. We do this by moving beyond evaluations, the collection and analysis of base-line data, and the identification of effective approaches. These activities are important and they should continue in a collaborative fashion between OERI, NCES, OIE, other Federal agencies, and Indian people. However, both quantitative and qualitative applied research efforts, with aca- demic rigor, are needed that focus on research questions that ad- dress teaching and learning. This type of research will not only in- form practice but hopefully, will impact policy and appropriations. The research forums currently being held as a result of the Presi- dential executive order will be helpful in determining important re- search questions that need to be asked and need to be answered. It is encouraging to note that there is a great deal of interest in Indian education research with more American Indian and Alaskan Natives conducting research. The National Indian Education Asso- ciation, The American Educational Research Association, The Com- prehensive Policy Statement, and the Presidential Executive order, all promote research. The Comprehensive Policy Statement makes a number of suggestions that are worthy of consideration for inclu- sion in the reauthorization. And Mr. Chairman, I would like to submit a copy of the Com- prehensive Policy Statement, known as the “red book” that was de- veloped by Indian people out in the field that The CHAIRMAN. Without objection that will be included in the record. Mr. Tippeconnic. Thank you. This policy statement, as 1 indicated, mentions research and it recommends, among other recommendations, that there be estab- lished a national center for Indian education research. That we build tribal capacity to conduct and be involved in the research process. Indian people should be doing more of the research in In- dian education. And that we insure protocol, especially tribal proto- col, is respected in the research process. And that accurate and re- liable data are used in the research process. Without question, parent involvement has been a strength in title IX. Parent committees have been given a voice with authority in the operation of programs and has been the entry point for many parents in the education of their children. However, we know that parent involvement continues to be a challenge for most programs in at least three ways. First, getting more parents involved in par- ent committees. Second, getting the regular classroom teachers in- volved with the parent committees and with parents in general.24 And third, getting parents to be involved in the daily school activi- ties of their children. Tf the LEA Formula Grant Program, requires a comprehensive program and a school wide approach to meeting the needs of In- dian children, including impacting title I, and regular classroom teachers, then it only makes sense that the parent committees’ role and responsibility also be comprehensive and go beyond the For- mula Grant Supplemental Program. I think there should be some language in the reauthorization that requires LEAs to coordinate parent committees with other governance bodies to facilitate parent committee involvement with classroom teachers. Let me just make one short comment about higher education. An initial strength of the program that became a weakness was pro- viding opportunities for colleges and universities to prepare Amer- ican Indians and Alaska Natives to become educators including ad- ministrators, counselors, and professionals ia the fields of medicine, psychology, law, engineering, business administration, natural re- sources, education, and related fields. The strengths and weak- nesses of the program are unfortunately related to funding. Al- though there are more American Indians and Alaska Natives at- tending colleges, we still need more. The current provisions in the law are adequate and I think they should remain. I am pleased that the department ran a competition this year for Demonstration and Professional Development Grants. But I also recommend that the Fellowship Program for Indian students remain. The Fellow- ship Program provides a choice of colleges for students to attend, and universities to earn a degree. And it also provides them a choice of what to major in. Just one final comment, I think that the section on grants to tribes for education, administration planning, and development should be retained. Tribes are key partners in the educational proc- ess of their tribal members. Any activity should include tribal in- volvement. This is only in keeping with the Federal responsibility, the government relationship, and the Federal policy of tribal self. determination. The CHAIRMAN. We need to move on, Doctor. Mr. TIPPECONNIC. Okay, the rest of my comments are included in the testimony. [Prepared statement of Mr. Tippeconnic appears in appendix.] The CHaiRMAN. That will be included in the record. But we need to have a little bit of time to ask some questions of you, too. Governor Tortalita, is that pronounced right? Am I pronouncing it right? Mr. TorTaita. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Your comments, I think, were really well re- ceived. When we want to build a building in a school district, a non-Indian school district, and we don't have the existing money, as we obviously do nationwide, local property taxes go up, and you get the money, if it is available, to build your school building. But Indian schools don’t have that option, because they can’t levy to raise taxes on tribal lands. So how do your schools, if Impact Aid is not there, if it can’t be used for construction, only for programs, how do you get the money for the construction if you need a new building?25 Mr. TorTALita. We currently have two things in place. I can’t re- member the exact dollars, but we are bonded to 100 percent capac- ity so, we have to raise school class construction moneys and for renovation, And we have gotten some dollar support through the State legislators and kind of matching funds with what is raised within the local community by tax incentives itself with properties. And also The CHainMAN. Taxing what properties? Mr. TorTALita. Properties within the school districts. The CHAIRMAN. Non-Indian properties? Mr. TorTAaita. Yes; non-Indian, and getting dollars from our State legislators in the State of New Mexico. So it has been a matching type of funding that we-—— The CHAIRMAN. Do you find that difficult to get money from the State legislature? Mr. TorTAuiTA, Yes; it has been. It has been very difficult, be- cause of not understanding, and they keep referring to $815 which aren't available. The CHAIRMAN. How many of your State legislators in New Mex- ico are Indian, are enrolled members of tribes? Mr. TorTALitA. Probably only about four members. The CHAIRMAN. Only four out of how many? Mr, Torta.ita. I can’t remember the exact number. The CHAIRMAN. That legislature only meets early spring for about 1 month in New Mexico? Mr. Tortauita. Yes; for 1 month. The CHAIRMAN. Okay, thank you. Mr. TorTALITA. One other point that I would like to make, and you know in order for education to really work, one of the things that has really been bothering me is that in the BIA schools we feed our students. But in the public schools, we do not feed our stu- dents. So what is the difference between Native American students that attend public schools and Native American students that at- tend BIA schools, and we do not treat them equally in not feeding them. ‘The CHAIRMAN, Lunch programs? Mr. TorTALITA. No. No. Not in the Indian school setting. The stu- dents have to pay for their own meals in the public school settings. And a student will not learn on an empty stomach. That is all i needed to say. The CHAIRMAN. But the students that have a free lunch or paid for, it’s not based on any ethnic consideration; it is based on in- come, isn’t it? So if they are below a certain income then they can get free school lunch. Mr. TorTatita. Right. But—— The CHAIRMAN. Indian students don’t qualify for that? Even if they are below a certain income? Mr. Torraira. Only very few. Probably less than 2 percent of them qualify. The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Charley, the Navajo Nation School System includes schools in four different States. Is that correct? Mr, CHARLEY. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. And I happen to live in that four corners area of the four States.26 We heard from other witnesses about the negative effects of Im- pact Aid in some States. What has your experience been with the four States: New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, and Utah? Do you find one more State supportive than the other when you need State help for Indian schools? Mr. CHARLEY. We have been getting a lot of support from Utah, Colorado, and Arizona. It is just that New Mexico continues to have the retention cycles. The CHAIRMAN. Well, in the State of Colorado, as an example, the Lieutenant Governor, by statute, only has one statutory duty, and that is to be the chair of the Commission on Indian irs so they can focus on some things of that nature. Do the other States have somebody in their State legislatures statutory designated to deal with the tribes? Mr. CHARLEY. Being more familiar with New Mexico, there is an office that is handling those types of issues. The CHAIRMAN. Certainly low funding levels result in fewer qualified teachers, poor schools, overcrowded classrooms, and things of that nature. And when you have that problem, you often have a problem with retaining accreditation. Have any of the Nav- ajo Nation schools lost accreditation because of these reasons? Mr. CHarey. Mr. Chairman, at this point in time, I am not aware of any Navajo Nation schools losing accreditation. The CHAIRMAN. Speak a little louder into the microphone, I can’t hear you. I am sorry. Mr. CHARLEY. Mr. Chairman, at this point in time, I am_not aware of any Navajo Nation school losing accreditation in New Mexico. The CHarRMAN. And, Mr. Gish. Your testimony lays out some support for the concept of forward funding revenues on Impact Aid. How would you describe how the funds are currently distributed? And how would forward funding help the school challenges? Mr. Gish. Mr. Chairman, the forward funding issue is one that plagues the Impact Aid program. Currently, appropriations come in the year that they are received. We all the school administrators, and boards of education, are asked to make decisions on programs and personnel very early in our school year, probably as early as March in the case of Minnesota. We have to essentially, predict or speculate that the Impact Aid dollars that will support the pro- grams, will be coming. As is evidenced in this current year, we ave not received our appropriations, and here we are at the end of October, at least two months into our school year. Therefore we are either working from fund balances that we have been able to maintain in our school district, or even worse, we may have had to go out as a school district and borrow dollars in order to be able to provide the funding for the programs and personnel. That of course, costs us interest dollars, and those dollars are never recoy- ered, and so the issue of forward funding is one that again, is just the fine tuning of the law, and one of which, if we just moved the funding cycle either by forward funding as a lot of education pro- grams that float through Congress are, or at least in our case, to be able to move it back a few months so that we don’t have to take the risk of not getting the dollars and therefore be obligated for those funds and have to take them from other programs.i The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. And Mr. Tippeconnic, you were once the director of the BIA’s Office of Indian Education. Is that not true? Mr. TippEconntc. Yes, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. How would describe the working relationship be- tween the Department of Education and the Bureau, regarding education of Indian kids? Mr. TippEconnic. A difficult one. The CuairMAn. Is it getting any better? Mr. TIPPECONNIC. I hope that it is getting better. I think it is dif- ficult, in that there wasn’t a real strong flow of communication, in my opinion, between the two departments. And the expectations seemed to be a little different. The CHairMan. You know that I introduced a bill, that tries to combine or at least require coordination of the existing programs in different agencies. Are you familiar with that bill? Mr. TIPPECONNIC. No, The CHAIRMAN. You might want to look it up, but I understand there has been some collaboration for research projects, things of that nature by the Department of Education, and the Office of Edu- cational Research, and other Federal agencies. | didn’t know if you thought that was an effective direction they are going, or not. Mr. TipPECONNIC. Without looking at your piece of legislation, I would in theory, support that. Some type of authority like that, I think, would speak loud and clear for coordination, and would prob- ably make it happen, and make it happen in a positive sense. Thank you The CHAIRMAN. Senator Inouye did you have further questions or comments? Senator [NouyE. I just want to make certain that, am I correct i ae that all of you are in favor of the reauthorization of title {All respond in the affirmative.] Senator INOUYE. And that all of you would like to have the loop- hole provided by 20 U.S.C. 7709 be closed? [All respond in the affirmative.]} Senator INOUYE. This is on Impact Aid? [All respond in the affirmative.] Senator INOUYE. On forward funding, I can understand your problem, but both of us are members of the Appropriations Com- mittee and, it would appear that it will not go too far. The only time they have used forward funding is to make certain that the budget is balanced. But, other than that, these things do not hap- pen. But, if we can close the loophole, it might help a little. Be- cause for the most part you can anticipate what Impact Aid will bring in. You heard the Secretary say that she would favor making edu- cational aid programs something other than just annual appropria- tion for the entitlement. Are you in favor of that? {Witnesses respond in the affirmative.] Senator INouyE. Well, I can assure you, Sir, that I will do my very best to see that title IX becomes authorized, and that the loop- hole is closed.28 I think if we can do those two things at this stage, we have done pretty well. Thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. I would add my voice to Senator Inouye’s and would also support closing that loophole. I would think that we'd have some problems with the States, because I rather doubt they would support it, even though it is the right thing to do. Well, with that, I appreciate this panel appearing here and with- out objection, Senator Akaka has introduced a statement for the record and that will be included too. [Prepared statement of Senator Akaka appears in appendix.] The CHAIRMAN. We may be issuing some followup questions, in fact to all of you, so if you could get back to us on that. We will keep this record open for 3 weeks. And with that, this committee hearing is adjourned. TWhereupon, at 10:54 a.m., the committee was adjourned, to re- convene at the call of the Chair.]APPENDIX ADDITIONAL MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD PREPARED STATEMENT OF Hon. DaNiEL K. INOUYE, U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWamt, Vice CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS. 1 am pleased to join Chairman Campbell in welcoming the witnesses who will tes- tify this morning on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. With an estimated Indian population of 2 million people and of those, approxi- mately 40 percent under the age of 20, the need for competitive, yet unique and cul- turally appropriate, Indian education is urgent. Currently, Indian students rank at or near the bottom of every educational indica- tor. Their educational attainment is inhibited by high rates of poverty, unemployment and health problems. In 1972, the Indian Education Amendments were enacted to provide supple- mentary funds for new programs targeted solely for Indian students. These amendments were incorporated into the Elementary and Secondary Edu- cation Act as title IX ‘And they provide continued funding for the unique and culturally related aca- demic needs of Indian students. ‘As a result, Indian children have made significant educational gains. For instance, between 1980 and 1990, the high school completion rate for Indian students living on reservations increased by 11 percent. Although this is good news, we must remember that much more is required. For at the same time, by 1990, 9 percent of Indian students who were 8th graders in 1988 had already dropped out of school. Thus, despite the gains, there is still a significant need for additional funding and innovative programs in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Finally, I must note that title IX also furthers the special historical and legal re- sponsibility of the Federal Government to the indigenous people of the United states. ‘And by allowing for moneys to be provided directly to tribal governments, it strengthens the government to government relationship between the Federal Gov- ernment and the Indian tribes and the Alaska Natives Indian children are vital to the future of a strong, productive and self-sufficient Indian country. ‘We must do everything possible to ensure that these future tribal leaders receive an edueation that is comparable to the education provided to all other American children. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to expeditious action on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and I commend you for scheduling today’s hearing on an issue that is critical to the future of America’s native peoples. (29)30 Prevaren StavemeNnr oF Hon. DANiFL K. AKAKA, U.S. SeNaTOR FROM HaWalL Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this important hearing on the reauthoriza- tion of tiles VIII and IX of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This is a significant step in continuing to address the unique educational needs of American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native Hawaiian communities. Such efforts are important to meet the educational and culturally related aca- demic needs of Native Americans which we know are frequently unaddressed, For example, school modernization problems prevalent in our public schools-crumbling buildings, poor air quality or ventilation, inadequate lighting-are heightened in Na- tive American schools. We need to find ways to help Native American communities overcome these acute barriers to effective learning faced by children everyday. The importance of education cannot be overstated. Innovative educational pro- grams that encourage family and community participation, preserve culture and as- sist Native peoples in accessing a good education are significant. in ensuring a bright, future for all of us. T look forward to reviewing the testimony that will be presented on this important issue. Preparep STATEMENT OF Hon. Kent Conran, U.S. SENATOR FROM NorTH Dakora, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act [ESEA) of 1965. This is a very important process, because the schools we provide for our children have an incredible impact on them during their formative years Education of Indian children is a Federal responsibility. The Bureau of Indian Af- fairs system is one of only two federally operated education systems (the Depart- ment of Defense system being the other] ‘To fulfill the obligations of the various treaties it signed with Indian nations, the Federal Government must assist tribes in meeting the education needs of Indian children. Federal education programs and funding can bring about long-term social and economic changes on Indian reservations, ‘The ESEA provides important funding for Indian education, including Impact Aid and programs specifically targeted toward the Native Americans, Alaska Natives, and Native Hawaiians. Unfortunately, like so many other programs created to fulfill the Federal responsibility to Indian ‘children, many of these programs are inad- ately funded or have not funded at all. Several programs within title IX of the EBEA have not been funded since the act was last authorized in 1994 Indian parents care deeply about the education their children receive; they know that a solid education is one of the most important factors in building a better fu- ture for their children and for Indian country as a whole. Like their parents, Indian students from North Dakota have also expressed to me their deep concern about their schools systems. They know that when education pro- grams are underfunded, or are not funded at all, the Federal Government is not liv- ing up to its promises. am also deeply concerned that inadequate educational opportunities contribute to the hopelessness and despair that many Indian children feel. How can, we tell Indian children that we care about their future if we cannot give them the education {hey need to prepare to compete in the world economy? -. President, I joined tribal leaders from the Great Plains at the White House earlier this year. One of the issues they raised with the President and his Cabinet members was education. They know that the Federal Government is not keeping its end of the bargain in providing a quality education for all Indian children. With the reauthorization of the ESEA, I believe we have an opportunity to do better by these young people. Today the committee will hear from experts in Indian education and learn what is needed in a reauthorized ESEA. I look forward to the witnesses’ testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.31 Testimony of Judith Johnson Acting Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education USS. Department of Education ‘On Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 USS. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs October 27, 1999 ‘Thank you Mr. Chairman, Senator Inouye, and members of the Committee for inviting me to discuss the Administration's proposal for the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and, in particular, the reauthorization of ESEA_ programs for American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. Five years ago, in the reauthorization of the ESEA, this Administration set out to ensure that ali children, regardless of background, could reach and would be held to high standards. The President and Secretary Riley reject the “tyranny of low expectations,” the deeply flawed assumption that it is acceptable to provide children in poverty with a second- or even a third- class education. This Administration has never been willing to accept that assumption. Every child needs and deserves a world class education. No child should be allowed to drift through school unable to read. No child should have an unqualified teacher. And no child should have to go toa failing school. Since that time, to help ensure that all students are challenged to achieve to their full ability, the States and school districts have taken significant steps to establish high standards for Page 132 all students, particularly poor and educationally disadvantaged students. More importantly, there are promising signs of real State progress toward meeting those standards. ‘The themes in our reauthorization proposal are intended to continue the progress that the nation’s schools have already made in helping all students increase their academic performance, including poor, minority, low-income, and educationally disadvantaged students. Our proposal builds on the 1994 reauthorization to encourage all of our students, including American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives, to improve their academic performance. To increase educational excellence and equity, the Administration's ESEA reauthorization proposal has six broad themes, They are: (1) implementing high standards in every classroom; (2) reducing class sizes in the early grades and helping every child read well by the 3rd grade, if not earlier; (3) strengthening teacher and principal quality; (4) emphasizing accountability for school and student performance, including tuming around failing schools, and toughening accountability in Federal education programs: (5) providing safe, healthy, and disciplined learning environments that better connect students, teachers, families, and communitic ind (6) Modernizing schools for the 21st Century by putting useful technology in the classrooms, making schools smaller and more personalized, increasing opportunities to lear foreign languages, and expanding after-school and summer programs. Our investments in Title f, Comprehensive School Reform Demonstrations, the Class- Size Reduction program, the Reading Excellence Act, and after-school programs, among others, are important components of our effort to get communities and their teachers and principals the resources they need to raise achievement for all students, including American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. These important investments, and their targeting provisions, rightly focus on providing resources to communities that do not have the necessary resources to Page 233 provide a world-class education to all their children so that the educational achievement gap between the “haves” and the “have nots" will, over time, disappear. Our reauthorization proposal recognizes that qualified teachers are a critical in-school factor in improving student achievement, and all of our children deserve to have high-quality and well-prepared teachers in the classroom. It would end the practice of putting unqualified teachers in front of the most educationally disadvantaged and educationally at-risk students, improve resources for professional development so that our teachers are able to improve their skills, rain educators in the use of technology in the classroom, prepare teachers to teach to high ‘standards for al} students, and help ensure that teachers are well trained to teach students with limited English proficiency. Our reauthorization proposal includes significant language on accountability that strikes a careful balance between, on the one hand, giving schools the increased support and flexibility they need to r achievement levels for all students and, on the other hand, holding schools accountable when they do not measure up to clearly established goals. Toward that end, our accountability provisions include measures intended to end social promotion, encourage school report cards, identify and turn around low-performing schools, improve discipline in schools and classrooms, and putting in place measurable ways to make change happen, such as standards- based assessments at different grade levels. ‘These measures will help improve the educational opportunities for American Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native students and focus more attention on helping them achieve to challenging standards. ‘American Indians and Alaska Natives have made progress in recent decades but continue jent and have fewer to be disproportionately affected by poverty and low educational atta Page 334 educational opportunities than other students. For example, recent data show that: ‘+ The high school completion rate for American Indians, ages 20 to 24, is 70 percemt, 12.5 percent below the national average ‘* In 1990, 36.2 percent of American Indian children ages 5-17 were living below the poverty level, compared with 17 percent of all other children, © In 1992, 31 percent of American Indian high school graduates eared the core credits recommended by 4 Nation at Risk -- a dramatic increase over the 6 percent reported in 1982. However, the proportion of American Indian high school ‘graduates taking the recommended core credits was well below that for all high school students (47 percent). ‘© American Indian students, on average, score lower on the National Assessment of Education Progress than other students, For example, 48 percent of American Indian 4th graders scored “at or above basic” on the 1994 reading assessment, compared to 60 percent of all students ‘© The combined score on the SAT in 1994-95 for American Indians was 850, or 60 points lower than the combined score of 910 reported for all students. © In 1990, 9.3 percent of American Indian persons 25 years old and over had attained a bachelor’s degree or higher, as compared to 20.3 percent for all persons. These data undergird the important role that the Indian Education programs play in supporting the academic achievement of American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. They also demonstrate the need for continued support for the important programs and Page 435 services that are provided under the Indian Educ: n, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native programs. In 1994, Congress amended the Indian Education authorization to focus programs on improving the capacity of schools to provide challenging curriculum to Indian students. The statute now supports a comprehensive approach to educational reform and helps ensure that Indians benefit from national education reforms and receive every opportunity to achieve to high standards. The Title IX Indian Education programs under ESEA provide direct assistance for the education of Indian children and adults; the training of Indian individuals as educators and in other professions serving Indian people; and research, evaluation, and data collection. The programs promote the efforts of local educational agencies, State educational agencies, and Indian tribes and organizations to meet the unique educational and culturally related needs of these students, These programs also provide the authority for our proposed initiative for an ‘American Indian Teacher Corps, through which 1,000 Indians will be recruited and trained to teach in areas where there are high concentrations of Indians. ‘The Administration's reauthorization proposal builds on the significant changes made in the 1994 reauthorization. While the proposal would maintain our commitment to the formula grant program to improve the quality of instruction that American Indian students receive, some minor changes are proposed. These changes include a clarification to eliminate confusion regarding the role of the parent committee, and a modification of the BIA application process to reduce redundancy in student identifications. Consistent with general Administration policy, several un-funded, generally duplicative authorizations would be repealed. This Administration is particularly committed to improving the educational achievement of American Indian, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native students. Our reauthorization proposal Page $36 is itself evidence of this commitment and the tremendous job done in the 1994 reauthorization to improve education programs for these students. The previous reauthorization made significant changes in the Indian Education programs, and we have spent the past several years implementing those important reforms, In our consultation with Indian educators, tribes, parents, and students, as well as with the broader education community, we heard a strong consensus for continuing with the current mission, (Our reauthorization proposals for the Native Hawaiian and Alasks Native programs are intended to ease the administration of the programs in order to facilitate implementation of the innovative educational strategies that are emerging from native educators in Hawaii and Alaska. ‘The current Native Hawaiian authorization has separate authorities in 7 different areas: Gifted and Talented Education; Special Education; Higher Education; Curriculum Development, Teacher Training, and Recruitment: Family-Based Education Centers; Community-Based Education Centers; and the Native Hawaiian Education and Island Councils. The current Alaska Native authorization has separate authorities in three different areas: Educational Planning, Curriculum Development, Teacher Training, and Recruitment; Home-Based Education for Preschool Children: and Student Enrichment Programs. Our experience has shown us that the particular requirements of these authorities has made it difficult to fund creative and new approaches to meeting the unique needs of Native Hawaiians and Alaska Natives. For the Native Hawaiian program, we propose to merge the 7 authorities into one comprehensive authority that would give the Department the flexibility to fund creative, cross- ‘cutting approaches to meeting the educational and culturally related needs of Native Hawaiian students. Similarly for the Alaska Native program, we propose to merge the three authorities into one comprehensive authority Page 637 The Administration strongly opposes the proposal by the House Education and the Workforce Committee to repeal the Native Hawaiian programs. The House Committee's action fails to consider the unique educational and culturally related needs of the Native Hawaiian population. I would also like to point out that our proposal would retain the current set-asides for native populations and the Bureau of Indian Affairs in our State formula programs (except where the bill would consolidate programs). These set-asides provide funding for Title 1, Class Size Reduction, professional development, Safe and Drug-Free Schools, and Homeless Education. These set-asides are important to maintain because they ensure that funds are available to serve the educational needs of American Indians, Native Hawaiians, and Alaska Natives. Our reauthorization proposal is not the only effort we are making to improve educational opportunities for Indian students. On August 6, 1998, President Clinton signed Executive Order 13096, which cited the importance of improving educational achievement and academic progress for American Indian and Alaska Native students and reaching the goal of preparing every student for responsible citizenship, continued learning, and productive employment. In order to fulfill that commitment, the President directed Federal agencies to focus special attention on six key goals, which include: 1) improving reading and mathematics; 2) increasing high school compl n and postsecondary attendance rates; 3) reducing the influence of long-standing factors that impede educational performance, such as poverty and substance abuse; 4) creating strong, safe, and drug-free schoo! environments: 5) improving science education; and Page 738 6) expanding the use of educational technology. The President called for the development of a comprehensive Federal Indian education policy to accomplish the six goals and address the fragmentation of government services and the complexity of inter-governmental relationships affecting the education of American Indian and Alaska Native students This Executive Order js an important step forward in addressing systemic and long- standing difficulties in meeting the unique needs of our American Indian and Alaska Native students. The resulting Policy will set the stage for important discussions surrounding the programs and services that we provide to American Indian and Alaska Native students, and will have a positive impact on the educational achievement and academic opportunities available to them. Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before this Committee. I look forward to discussing our reauthorization proposal with you and answering any questions that you may have.39 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION OFFICE OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION ‘THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY November 16, 1999 Honorable Ben Nighthorse Campbell Chairman United States Senate Committee on Indian Affairs Washington, D.C. 20510-6450 Dear Mr. Chairman: Enclosed is the Department's response to the questions that you submitted in writing following my testimony before your committee in October. We appreciate this opportunity to further articulate our proposals and priorities and look forward to continuing to work with you and the other Members of your committee. Acting Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education Enclosure 00 INDEPENDENCE AVE. SW WASHINGTON D.C. 20202-0100,40 IMPACT AID - Equalization process ‘There seems to be some confusion regarding the Equalization process and how a state, such as New Mexico ends up with approximately 95% of its LEAs' Impact Aid, Can you explain what happens to Impact Aid money once it is sent to a LEA if its state meets the disparity test? How does the state end up with the money? Answer: Although local schoo! district officials sometimes describe the impact Aid equalization provisions in a way that suggests that the State receives a portion of their Impact Aid payments, this is not accurate. Impact Aid is paid directly to local school districts, where it becomes part of the general fund available for current expenditures Section 8009 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) generally prohibits States from reducing State education aid to districts that receive Impact Aid, The law includes an exception, however, for those States with education funding programs that are determined to be equalized. Section 8009 provides a “disparity test” to measure how well the State's funding program is equalized. The disparity test examines whether the degree of disparity in per-pupil expenditures or revenues of the school districts at the fifth and the ninety-fifth percemties (in per-pupil funding)is 25 percent or less, Under the current statutory provisions, a State that meets this standard is deemed to be equalized. Alaska, Kansas, and New Mexico currently meet this standard and are permitted under the statute to reduce State education aid to local school districts Ghat receive Impact Aid. ‘The purpose of this exception in the law is to prevent Impact Aid from disequalizing education funding in States that are otherwise substantially equalized Schoo! districts in States that are determined to be equalized under these provisions retain all of their impact Aid. After the certified States are informed of the distribution of Impact Aid, they may reduce the amounts of State education aid to these school districts under the State funding formulas. A certified State may deduct Impact Aid in the proportion that local tax revenues covered under a State equalization program are of total Jocal tax revenues. Before the proportion is applied, certain categories of Impact Aid must be excluded from the calculation of the State’s offset. Specifically, no offsets may be taken for: (1) Impact Aid payments for children with disabilities under section 8003(d); (2) Impact Aid payments for heavily impacted districts under section 8003(N}; (3) Impact Aid payments for children with disabilities under section 8003(g); and (4) the portion of Impact Aid basic support payments attributable to the extra formula weight for children residing on Indian lands. Because of these exclusions, it is unlikely that a State could offset as much as 95 percent of a school district's Impact Aid. IMPACT AID - Equalization formula Question: Do you feel the disparity test used to determine whether a state is equalized is an accurate test? What factors are used to determine when a state is equalized? What types of numbers do you feel should be examined when determining equalization? Answer We believe the current disparity testis generally a reasonable representation of the degree of equalization ina State. Other more mathematically complex formulas are sometimes used to evaluate equalization, but the disparity test is easily understood by State and41 local school district officials, and readily applied. We believe the problem resides with the adequacy of State funding for education, The disparity test does not consider the adequacy of the education funding provided by the State program. In New Mexico, where several school districts have challenged the State’s right to reduce State aid to Impact Aid recipients, the average per-pupil expenditure is significantly below the national average, Some school districts in New Mexico believe that they do not receive sufficient funds from State aid to provide adequate services, As part of the Administration's reauthorization proposal for Impact Aid, we are proposing to add a minimum funding requirement to the disparity test in Section 8009 of the ESEA. In addition to meeting the disparity test, any State seeking permission to offset Impact Aid in its State formula would be required to demonstrate that the average per-pupil expenditure in the State is at least 80 percent of the national average During the 1994 reauthorization of the ESEA, the Administration proposed to make the disparity test more rigorous over time by requiring a reduced dis, of 20 percent or less between the per-pupil expenditures of the school districts at the fifth and the ninety-fifth percentiles in the State. The Congress initially adopted this more stringent standard, but later amendments returned the law to the original standard, INDIAN EDUCATION — Cultural ses of teachers Question: In your testimony, you discussed the need for teachers working with In. students to have culturally sensitivity training and to be aware of the influence the student's unique heritage has on their learning experience. Does the Department of Education presently provide any type of sensitivity training or is there any funds available for such training? Answer: The Department does not provide sensitivity training directly to teachers; however, program funds may be used by grantees for professional development and other in- service activities that include such training, The use of funds in this manner is allowable under the Indian Education Formula Grants to Local Educational Agency Program and the two discretionary grant programs, Demonstration Grants for Indian Children and Professional Development. Page 2